Don Thomas PBS mag letter

[Lenny Stankowitz]

"We chase the dream,he is just there because we want to go."

I mentioned that earlier.  Any one of us, including myself, who has ever paid to go on a hunt is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Is it right for "us" to pay to go on an African dream hunt, or a Canadian moose or bear hunt, or a buffalo hunt in Australia, or a whitetail hunt in Illinois, or even a hog hunt in Texas and then return home to complain that outfitters are leasing up all the land in our back yard for the purpose of charging someone else to help fulfill their own specific "dream."

Ray brings up a very interesting point regarding "greed."  It very much is a word or a "concept" that is much overused and misused for that matter.  Greed always seems to apply to "other people" trying to make a living, but for some reason, it never seems to apply to "us."  Are we somehow more noble because of what we hunt with?  

In my opinion, if we are ever going to solve the problems that Mr. Thomas and other's (including myself) are concerned with, we might need to explore the "concept" of greed a little further.

People like Chuck Adams and Ted Nugent are routinely criticized for "selling out," making their living by pimping themselves out (endorsing products), writing articles and selling them to different publications, speaking at seminars etc.  How is that different from the owners of TBM selling advertising space in their magazine, selling TBM logo apparel, etc, etc, etc?  Mr. Thomas and many others make their living as outdoor writers.  Hunters and fishermen support them by purchasing their books and the publications that buy the accounts of their exploits, many times in far off places and exotic locations.  Many of these writers are given free hunts, with the idea that they will promote that specific outfitter in their next story.  Is this a bad thing?  In my opinion, MOST DEFINATELY NOT.  I admire a man or woman that has found a way to make their passion their living.  Does this make them "greedy?"  I don't think so, but we still need to be honest with ourselves.  WE ARE THE PROBLEM.  How can we rant and rave about the "greedy landowners" leasing their land for high dollar hunts and the commercialism that has taken over our sport, and then purpetuate that very thing by either doing the very same things ourselves or supporting those that do?  Is it right for me to pay to hunt bears in Canada, Whitetails in Iowa, and Hogs in Texas and then try to eliminate or severely curtail the right for someone else to do the same thing here in Michigan?  Is it right for an outdoor writer to make his living writing about his exploits and then expect his readers to not want to do the very thing he writes about?  Is it right for a publication to print a compilation of these exploits every month, for the sole purpose of selling them to as many subscribers as possible, which in turn allows them to sell advertising in their publication?  Is it then right to expect the readers of these exploits to not turn around and want to participate in such things?  Lets even go one step further.  It was mentioned earlier that maybe one way to curb this trend is to tax landowners at a higher rate if they are leasing their land to hunters. Should we then expect outdoor writers that get free or reduced rate hunts to report the fair market value of those hunts as income?  What about a "personality" that gets free equipment?  Should they report that as income?  I'm quite certain that many of those "perks" go unreported.  I'm not saying they should be reported but we need to look at ourselves as closely as we look at others.

Before someone calls me a name for piling on, or disrespecting Mr. Thomas, or TBM, or even Chuck and Ted, understand that I personally buy the books, subscribe to the magazines and pay to hunt in other states and countries.  I AM ALSO PART OF THE PROBLEM.  I mean no disrespect to any of the above, I am just trying to illustrate what Ray said in his earlier post.  This problem is very complex and it has many different levels and layers.

I don't have the answers but I do believe that if squirrels and carp had antlers, someone would pay thousands of dollars to kill the biggest one.

Maybe we should start there.

Lenny

[vermonster13]

What so many see as a problem is also a part of what keeps hunting viable sadly. The dollars hunters spend is a big part of our political clout that keeps hunting alive. Many of the economies of these places get a large share of their income from non-resident hunters. Ask the businesses in the part of western Canada that the hunting rights were purchased by anti's how they've been doing during the time hunting has been closed down. The issues are complex as I stated earlier and always land access is the key issue. Private land will always be exactly that and it will take money to open such lands to hunting and some never will be. Question is how much are you willing to add to your license costs for programs to pay landowners for public access?

Working with your state to find ways for better access to public lands through right-aways and enforcement of laws on the books that grant those accesses is key. Many folks aren't even aware of their rights when it comes to BLM lands and such in western states. These ranches are paying for grazing rights and that's it, they have no right to deny access and many gates are illegal. Knowing property lines and such is important, I have friends who hunt such lands and carry a GPS with the boundries programmed in so that they can prove exactly where they are when hunting and they know their rights.

Lack of education on our part is part of the problem. Get involved, get educated and work to help others.

[Terry Green]

I'm not sure why this was moved here off the PowWow after 7 pages running on the PowWow.

So, I'm going to move it back to the PowWow for now.....